Parting shot skypair? I'm not sure what you mean by "trust the Bible."
It appears to me that you want us to interpret the Bible the way you do and that amounts to trusting the Bible. But the Bible never ever asks you to put your trust in the Bible. It tells you to put your trust in Christ. Frankly the idea that agreeing with skypair equals trusting the Bible is kind of insulting.
It may be that the Methodist men's group you've been hanging with is either easily swayed away from United Methodist teaching or they are just being gracious and allowing you to express your Baptist views without changing their own.
But what you've run into here is a group that is largely made up of clergy and very well educated laypeople of Wesleyan denominations. We know what our denominations teach. We are not so easily swayed to agree with you or anyone else just because they pop into our forum and start teaching another theology.
As per the Methodist Mens group;
I had an inverse experience, and in some ways still do. I am an avid motorcyclist and so is my wife; we each own motorcycles, and we each ride a lot. Over time we ran into a group called the "Christian Motorcyclist Association". I checked them out online and though I found that the website only used the KJV, their "what we believe" page was pretty standard fare, apostles creed Christianity; very basic stuff. Other Christian biker groups include things like baptism, sexuality, one even said that "The church is to be autonomous and run by the laity" as a part of their "What we believe" section. So while it was obvious CMA wasn't a Wesleyan group; it seemed maybe they were a little less fundamentalist. Turns out, that wasn't really true. Not of the local chapter, not of the organization as a whole. It's a very fundie theology group.
I joined the group though; and I didn't make waves. They had Bible studies, I participated. Their theology was, frankly, bad. I'd inject something here or there but would not argue. Usually I'd just sit back and listen, occasionally interject a differing point of view. Once they asked me to lead it, I explained to them my theology was very different than my own; they said "That's okay we'd appreciate the perspective", so I brought in a stack of study materials I had (to keep it a little more structured) and they pretty unanimously selected "When Christians Get it Wrong" by Adam Hamilton. I said "He's pretty liberal on this one, are you sure?" (Disclaimer, it's a very middle-of-the-road, both-sides-represented study. But in THEIR context, he was as liberal as anyone they'd ever heard from or read. These were all members of capital "S" SBC churches, and fundie non-denoms. ) They said yes. Basically, they picked apart the whole thing and at the end, determined Adam Hamilton was just a heretic. Though as usual, I tried to present an alternative point of view, but mostly sat and listened.
They might've gotten the impression that I agreed with them, or that their theology was my theology. But silence shouldn't be mistaken for agreeance. It was simply my desire to be a witness and engage with them, even if just for the fellowship. They invited me to be a part of it, and I obliged.
It didn't end well though. Actually it turned out to be the "Authority of Clergy" that caused a division. They elected me their Chaplain. I stood up and gave a short 'speech' about my theology being very different than theirs, about them not being a priority (my church is and always will be my first ministry), and frankly I didn't even much approve of their method of evangelism. I thought for sure they'd hang me after that one; but they elected me Chaplain. But, then I found out the Chaplain was a "see not heard" "pray for me" position, and when I made some suggestions during a leadership meeting it upset some folks, who had this idea that a Pastor was not an authority figure (they told me that, "A Pastor is a servant, not an authority, you're a Pastor you should know that"), so some regional leadership pulled me aside and told me I had overstepped. I said 'ok' and didn't think anything of it, their house, their rules. Evidently though, it royally upset the entire leadership of this chapter and they all left; and sort of took me with them. I still meet with that small group regularly. They are good friends. Their theology is still not my own; but our common interests are God and Motorcycles; and we do those things well. They are probably some of my closest friends. We've been on several hundred mile motorcycle trips together, we've spent hours working on each others bikes, we've sat at each others bedside in the hospitals at 2AM. We're a pretty impervious, inseparable group, even though we aren't even close theologically. We don't need to debate. They don't argue and try to change my theology or demand I explain it, and I don't argue and try to change their theology or demand they explain it. They've even been to my church a few times and I've been to theirs (when their church has had some sort of a special worship service that didn't coincide with one mine did, like an early afternoon Good Friday service).
So just because this Methodist Mens fellowship didn't argue with Skypair, doesn't necessarily mean they agreed. Perhaps they do! Admittedly, I've known a few UM's whose theology didn't seem to fit the UMC. But as for the three of us, and I know this might sound "elitist", but we've been tested and vetted by our denominations (especially Circuitrider and GraceSeeker as they are Ordained; I'm a Local Pastor seeking Ordination), so our theology is at least close enough to Methodism for the UMC to say "Take authority in our church, lead the sacraments and teach our doctrine". What variances you'll see between the three of us, at least so far in my experience, is more/less as much variance as you'll see among most UM Clergy. In other words, a little difference on a handful of issues but for the most part; unity in what's essential. Really emobdying, I think, John Wesley's quote, "In essentials, unity, in non-essentials, liberty, in all things, Charity"
